ArticleBMC health services research2006
Coping with methodological dilemmas; about establishing the effectiveness of interventions in routine medical practice.
Article in BMC health services research, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring qualitative methods reported in registered trials and their yields (EQUITY): systematic review.Trials · 2018Pooled it
- Implementing Kanyini GAP, a pragmatic randomised controlled trial in Australia: findings from a qualitative study.Trials · 2015Trial
- Screening for obstructive sleep apnea on the internet: randomized trial.The American journal of medicine · 2009Trial
- Improving support for family caregivers: A mixed-methods effect evaluation of an organizational intervention.Palliative & supportive care · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a large scale implementation of disease management programmes in various Dutch regions: a study protocol.BMC health services research · 2011Article
- Translating evidence into practice for people with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee.Clinical rheumatology · 2007Review
- Tailoring intervention procedures to routine primary health care practice; an ethnographic process evaluation.BMC health services research · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this paper is to show how researchers balance between scientific rigour and localisation in conducting pragmatic trial research. Our case is the Quattro Study, a pragmatic trial on the effectiveness of multidisciplinary patient care teams used in primary health care centres in deprived neighbourhoods of two major cities in the Netherlands for intensified secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases.
methodsFor this study an ethnographic design was used. We observed and interviewed the researchers and the practice nurses. All gathered research documents, transcribed observations and interviews were analysed thematically.
resultsConducting a pragmatic trial is a continuous balancing act between meeting methodological demands and implementing a complex intervention in routine primary health care. As an effect, the research design had to be adjusted pragmatically several times and the intervention that was meant to be tailor-made became a rather stringent procedure.
conclusionA pragmatic trial research is a dynamic process that, in order to be able to assess the validity and reliability of any effects of interventions must also have a continuous process of methodological and practical reflection. Ethnographic analysis, as we show, is therefore of complementary value.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.